GA4: Back up configuration

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint; the description adds the crucial behavioral fact that the result lands as a local JSON file and must be read back with backup_read, plus the rationale that GA4 keeps no version history. Note the mild tension with readOnlyHint=true, since a local file is written, but the description discloses this explicitly rather than contradicting it, so an agent is not misled.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and scope, followed by the justification and the retrieval pointer. Nothing is redundant and no sentence could be removed without losing routing or rationale information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a two-parameter export tool with no output schema, the description covers what is produced (a local JSON file), where to get it (backup_read), and why it matters (no native GA4 versioning). Nothing an agent needs in order to call and follow up correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with both `property` and `label` documented including examples and the 'manual' default, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema — it only describes what the backup contains, not how the parameters shape it.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ("Backs up the complete configuration of a property") and enumerates exactly what is captured: settings, data streams incl. enhanced measurement, key events, custom dimensions/metrics, data retention, links. It is clearly distinguished from GTM export siblings by naming GA4 property scope, and it routes to backup_read for retrieval.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives the operating context that makes the tool necessary — "GA4 has no versions — this is the state to restore from" — which tells an agent to run it before destructive changes. It also names the follow-up tool (backup_read). It stops short of explicit when-not guidance or naming a specific alternative backup mechanism, so it is not a full 5.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.